RE: ISSUE 3564: Optional Assertions may not be usable in all cir cumstances from Glen Daniels on 2006-09-27 (public-ws-policy@w3.org from September 2006)

From: Glen Daniels <gdaniels@progress.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 12:45:13 -0400
To: <public-ws-policy@w3.org>
Message-ID: <80A43FC052CE3949A327527DCD5D6B2701E6C1A8@MAIL01.bedford.progress.com>

Hi Frederick:

> It is difficult to combine the concept of optional with its  
> normalization implications with flagging items that can be ignored  
> without implication of actual impact.

Why is that?  Optional means that there is both an acceptable
alternative without this assertion, and one with this assertion.  Isn't
that the same thing as saying that the item can be ignored at the whim
of the consumer?

This seems true regardless of whether the given assertion has an
"impact" vis. the wire messages.

--Glen

Received on Wednesday, 27 September 2006 16:52:02 UTC